UC-NRLF 


B    3    135    33b 


m^ 


IThe  Amusement   Situation 
in   the   City  of  Boston 

Based  on  a  study  of  the  thea- 
tres  for    ten    weeks    from 
November  28,  1909, 
to  February  5, 
I  9  I  o 


Price 

10 
Cents 


leing  a  report  prepared   by  The  Drama 
Committee  of  The  Twentieth  Century  Club 


«jo7 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2008  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosQft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/amusementsituatiOOtwenricli 


THE  AMUSEMENT  SITUATION  IN  BOSTON 

A  REPORT  MADE  BY  THE  DRAMA  COMMITTEE  OF  THE 
TWENTIETH  CENTURY  CLUB,  COVERING  A  PERIOD  OF 
TEN  WEEKS  FROM  NOV.  28,    I909,  TO  FEB.    5,    I9IO 

I 

The  Drama  Committee  of  the  Twentieth  Century 
Club  has  undertaken  a  study  of  the  theatres  and 
moving-picture  shows  of  Boston  for  a  period  of 
ten  weeks,  to  discover  just  what  sort  of  enter- 
tainment is  presented  the  citizens  of  an  American 
city  in  the  middle  of  the  forty-week  theatrical 
season.  While  if  the  whole  forty  weeks  had  been 
covered  the  percentages  might  somewhat  vary 
from  the  figures  given,  yet  this  statement  of  the 
different  kinds  of  entertainment  given  for  a  quarter- 
season  should  at  least  provide  definite  data  to  take 
the  place  of  the  assumptions  that  have,  in  the  past, 
been  based  upon  mere  conjecture. 
A  cursory  examination  of  the  attractions  in  the 
principal  theatres  during  the  period  under  obser- 
vation reveals  at  the  outset  certain  definite  facts. 
It  is  notable  that  the  different  theatre  manage- 
ments, exclusive  of  those  giving  burlesque  and 
vaudeville,  make  no  attempt  to  establish  a  per- 
manent clientele, — a  fundamental  need  in  the  con- 
duct of  any  other  business.  It  is  difficult,  for  in- 
stance, to  understand  what  prompted  the  Shuberts, 
after  opening  their  new  theatre  with  two  weeks  of 
Shakespeare  by  Sothern  and  Marlowe,  to  put  on 
for    their    second    attraction    as    commonplace    a 

285926 


musical  comedy  as  "The  Midnight  Sons."  The 
Majestic  Theatre,  located  a  block  or  two  away 
and  of  substantially  the  same  capacity,  changed 
its  attraction  on  the  same  day  from  "The  Beauty 
Spot"  to  "The  Melting  Pot."  As  both  theatres 
are  under  the  same  management,  it  would  seem 
much  more  logical  to  have  placed  "The  Melting 
Pot"  in  the  Shubert  and  "The  Midnight  Sons" 
in  the  Majestic;  particularly  as  the  acoustics  of 
this  house  are  so  bad  that  spoken  lines  are  heard 
imperfectly  in  most  parts  of  the  house. 
The  Majestic,  Shubert,  and  Globe  Theatres  are 
now  all  under  the  Shubert  management,  and  there 
is  no  reason  why  the  Shubert  Theatre  could  not 
consistently  be  given  first-class  serious  attractions, 
the  Majestic  musical  comedies,  and  the  Globe 
farces  and  other  light  performances  more  accept- 
able to  its  clientele  already  partially  established. 
Of  the  other  Boston  Theatres,  the  HoUis,  the 
Colonial,  the  Boston,  and  the  Park  are  all  under 
the  same  control,  and  are  booked  through  the 
regular  syndicate  agency  popularly  known  as  the 
"Theatrical  Trust."  Yet,  while  the  Hollis  has 
generally  had  the  better  class  of  serious  and  light 
drama,  the  Colonial  has  alternated  from  serious 
and  comedy  attractions  to  musical  performances 
of  the  cheaper  type.  The  Park  is  smaller,  and  has 
been  given  over  to  the  longer  "runs"  of  popular 
plays.  The  Tremont — long  the  only  independent 
house  in  the  city,  but  now  booked  through  the 
above  organization — is  yet  less  consistently  run 
than  under  the  direct  control  of  its  previous  man- 
agement, when  for  months  at  a  time  one  first- 
class  musical  attraction  regularly  succeeded  an- 
other. 

Existing  moving-picture  shows  now  seat  402,428 
persons  weekly.  By  the  end  of  another  year  this 
class  of  amusement  houses  will  probably  accommo- 
date 510,428  spectators  each  week,  exclusive  of 
4 


Sunday  performances  and  of  other  smaller  picture 
shows  that  will,  undoubtedly,  spring  up  during  that 
time !  * 

Then  include  the  four  theatres  devoted  to  what  is 
called  "Burlesque":  the  Casino,  with  a  weekly 
seating  capacity  of  24,496;  the  Howard,  with 
17,868;  the  Columbia,  21,588;  the  Gaiety,  17,- 
748, — a  total  weekly  seating  capacity  for  this 
form  of  entertainment  of  80,700.  Add  to  these 
the  Palace,  Hub,  Bowdoin  Square,  and  Austin  & 
Stone's  (theatres  giving  moving  pictures  and  vaude- 
ville), with  a  total  weekly  seating  capacity  of 
79,362  people.  Finally,  add  the  best  class  of 
vaudeville  theatres,  limited  to  Keith's  and  the 
American  Music  Hall,  the  first  seating  24,240  and 
the  second  21,504  a  week,  or  a  total  of  45,744. 
These  figures  show  that  to-day  Boston  has  weekly 
accommodation  for  608,238  persons.  Within  a 
year  this  provision  will  be  increased  to  at  least 
750,238.  For  the  ten  weeks  reported  upon,  the 
total  seating  capacity  of  these  theatres  was 
6,082,380.  To  this  sum  must  be  added  372,522 
seats  to  be  deducted  from  the  total  of  the  regular 
theatres  on  account  of  the  performances  like  "The 
Jolly  Bachelors"  and  "The  Follies  of  1909,"  which 
were  only  vaudeville.  This  would  show  a  total 
of  6,454,902  seats  for  ten  weeks  of  vaudeville, 
burlesque,  and  moving-picture  performances! 
To  offset  this,  there  are  ten  regular  theatres,  with 
weekly  seating  capacity  as  follows:  Hollis,  13,120; 
Boston,  22,784;  Park,  10,200;  Colonial,  12,816; 
Majestic,  13,800;  Globe,  12,248;  Tremont,  13,880; 
Castle  Square,  21,756;  Grand  Opera,i7,8ii;  and 
the  recently  opened  Shubert,  12,720, — or  a  total 
of  151,135  seats  per  week  as  against  608,238  vaude- 
ville, burlesque,  and  moving-picture  show  capacity. 

*  Already  the  foundations  are  laid  for  the  National  Theatre,  on  Tremont  Street 
near  Berkeley,  to  be  used  for  combined  vaudeville  and  moving  pictures,  and  to  seat 
3,Sgo.  A  new  vaudeville  theatre  is  also  projected  for  the  Park  Square  district,  to  seat 
1,600. 


For  the  ten  weeks  these  theatres  actually  showed 
a  total  capacity  of  1,020,751,  making  deductions 
for  omitted  performances  and  vaudeville.  Add 
the  Boston  Opera  House,  with  a  weekly  capa- 
city, estimating  five  performances,  of  13,590  peo- 
ple. For  the  six  weeks,  the  actual  number  during 
which  opera  was  performed,  the  capacity  was 
81,540  seats.  The  ten  weeks'  total  for  legitimate 
drama  and  opera  would  then  be  1,102,291. 
Taken  with  the  total  of  6,454,902  seats  for  vaude- 
ville, burlesque,  and  moving-picture  attractions, 
the  grand  total  seating  capacity  for  all  kinds  of 
performances  was  7,557,193,  for  ten  weeks  in  a  city 
having  an  estimated  population  of  625,000! 
Those  familiar  with  the  field  in  other  sections  of 
the  country  state  that  Boston  has  a  greater  num- 
ber of  performances  of  the  cheaper  class  in  pro- 
portion to  the  population  than  any  other  American 
city,  not  excepting  New  York  or  Philadelphia. 
Certainly,  the  record,  as  compiled  above,  goes  far 
to  substantiate  this  claim. 

The  percentage  of  each  class  of  entertainment, 
based  on  these  totals,  Is  as  follows:  vaudeville  and 
moving-picture  shows,  85.4;  legitimate  performances, 
13.5;  grand  opera,  i.i. 

The  subdivisions  given  in  the  tables  bear  the  fol- 
lowing percentages  to  the  whole:  Shakespearian 
drama,  0.9;  Drama,  1.7;  Melodrama,  3.6;  Farce, 
1.3;  Minstrels,  0.3;  Comedy,  4.9;  Musical  Comedy, 
5.5  (of  which  only  0.7  approaches  legitimate  comic 
opera);  and,  finally,  Dancing,  1.2. 
The  two  principal  vaudeville  theatres  seated  6.1% 
of  the  whole;  burlesque,  10.7%;  combined  vaude- 
ville and  moving-picture  theatres,  10.5%;  moving- 
picture    shows,    53.3%. 

The  eight  first-class  theatres  seated  14.8%;*  the 
stock   theatres   (Including  ten  weeks  of  the  Castle 

•The  difference  between  this  figure  and  the  I3S%  given  above  arises  from  the 
previous  deduction  of  attendance  at  the  legitimate  theatres  at  performances  mainly  of 
a  vaudeville  character. 


Square  and  three  weeks  of  the  Bowdoin  Square), 
3.4%;  the  Grand  Opera  House,  with  straight 
melodrama,  2.4%.  These  "seating  capacities" 
are  easily  reduced  to  their  money  values.  At 
$0.10  a  seat,  the  moving-picture  shows  have  an  in- 
come of  ^40,242.80  per  week;  the  four  moving- 
picture  and  vaudeville  theatres  (averaged  at  $0.15 
a  seat),  ^11,904.30;  the  vaudeville  theatres  and 
burlesque  houses  (at  an  average  of  ^0.50  a  seat), 
$27,872  and  $40,350  per  week,  respectively;  the 
eight  regular  theatres  (at  $1  average  per  seat), 
$111,568;  the  Castle  Square  and  Grand  Opera 
House  (at  an  average  of  $0.35  per  seat),  $13,898.45; 
the  Boston  Opera,  with  13,590  seats  (averaged  at 
$2  apiece),  $27,180.  The  total  expenditure  for 
amusements  in  Boston  figured  on  seating  capacity 
would  be  $273,000  a  week. 

The  overwhelming  preponderance  of  cheaper  and 
less  desirable  forms  of  entertainment  is  to  be 
noted.  Yet  these  theatres  evidently  appeal  more 
and  more  strongly  to  their  habitues.  The  great 
growth  of  new  houses  of  this  type  indicates  not  only 
a  rapidly  increasing  following,  but  also  a  tremen- 
dous and  growing  tendency  toward  a  lower  and  less 
desirable  form  of  recreative  amusement.  This 
tendency  is  to  be  seriously  condemned.  It  is  also 
to  be  regarded  with  something  of  alarm;  since  a 
constant  attendance  upon  such  forms  of  enter- 
tainment— if  long  persisted  in — cannot  but  make 
the  spectator  less  able  to  enjoy  genuine  dramatic 
art,  or  any  other  serious  and  profitable  amusement. 
The  fact,  also,  that  a  large  proportion  of  the  enter- 
tainments in  even  the  first-class  theatres  is  of  a 
strikingly  vulgar  character,  approaching  burlesque 
or  vaudeville  (as  are  most  of  the  so-called  musical 
comedies  of  the  day)  indicates  that  the  theatre, 
potentially  a  tremendous  educative  force,  has  under 
present  conditions  so  degenerated  that  it  is  ac- 
tively exercising  an  equally  tremendous  and  wide- 


spread  influence  In  lowering  public  standards  of 
morality  and  decreasing  the  average  of  efficiency  of 
the  individual  citizen. 


II 

The  statistics  in  this  ten-week  review  have  been 
compiled  in  three  tables.  The  first*  shows  the  at- 
tractions playing  at  the  eight  principal  theatres,  the 
Grand  Opera  House,  and  at  the  theatres  running 
stock  companies, — the  Castle  Square;  and  the  Bow- 
doin  Square,  up  to  the  time  it  was  changed  to  mov- 
ing-picture shows  and  vaudeville. 
A  second  set  of  two  tables  gives  statistics  in  re- 
gard to  theatres,  and  moving-picture  shows  other 
than  those  holding  a  theatrical  license. 
The  third  table  shows  an  analysis,  roughly  classi- 
fying the  plays  produced  during  this  period  accord- 
ing to  their  general  character,  giving  the  number  of 
performances  and  the  total  seating  capacity  to  which 
they  were  capable  of  playing  during  that  time. 
On  account  of  the  great  divergence  In  the  size  of 
the  auditoriums  (running  from  250  up  to  3,000 
seating  capacity)  and  in  the  number  of  perform- 
ances each  week  (running  from  5  up  to  78)  all  com- 
parisons are  based  on  the  "seating  capacity"  of  the 
houses  per  week,  as  on  the  whole  the  fairest  method. 
To  obtain  the  total  seating  capacity  of  the  Boston 
theatres  and  moving-picture  shows  for  the  regular 
forty  weeks'  season,  it  is  only  necessary  to  multiply 
the  total  figures  given  by  four,  remembering, 
however,  that  the  moving-picture  shows  run  the 
entire  fifty-two  weeks  of  the  year,  and  that  a  number 
of  theatres,  both  burlesque  and  first-class,  run 
nearly  through  the  summer  season;  while  others — 
such  as  the  Globe — are  transformed  into  moving- 
picture  houses,  and  kept  open  through  the  summer, 
giving  four  to  eight  performances  a  day. 

•Table  I  will  be  found  on  pages  18-19;  Tables  II  and  III  on  pages  10-12  inclusive. 

8 


It  being  impracticable  to  obtain  from  the  manage- 
ment of  the  various  houses  exact  figures  for  at- 
tendance during  the  period  under  analysis,  the 
basis  of  seating  capacity  has  been  employed  through- 
out. While  at  times  of  the  day  the  moving-picture 
show  is  not  full,  at  other  times  there  are  from  fifty 
to  one  hundred  people  standing  at  the  back,  and 
all  seats  are  occupied.  The  first-class  theatres 
rarely  play  to  less  than  two-thirds  of  the  house 
capacity,  while  they  often  have  three  or  four  hun- 
dred standing  admissions  at  a  performance.  Mov- 
ing-picture shows  must  run  to  from  one-half  to  two- 
thirds  and  the  theatre  to  from  two-thirds  to  three- 
fourths  its  total  capacity  to  meet  their  expenses. 
The  listed  seating  capacities  of  the  theatres  and 
moving-picture  shows  are,  in  all  cases,  taken  from 
figures  given  on  the  city  records.  In  some  cases 
the  capacity  of  the  house  is  probably  more.  The 
Boston  Theatre,  for  Instance,  rated  by  the  city 
at  2,848,  is  always  figured  at  3,172;  which  figure 
appears  again  in  print  in  the  current  American 
Magazine  for  March. 

The  number  of  performances  of  the  moving-picture 
shows  has  been  compiled  from  statements  from  the 
managers;  yet  these  figures  cannot  be  considered 
as  so  authoritative,  as  the  length  of  performance 
is  varied  according  to  the  attendance.  At  morning, 
and  about  six  o'clock,  when  the  attendance  is 
lightest,  the  program  is  run  to  greater  length  with- 
out the  repetition  of  any  one  feature;  while  during 
the  crowded  part  of  the  evening  and  the  afternoon 
the  program  is  made  considerably  shorter,  to  take 
care  of  the  crowd  waiting  for  seats.  The  varia- 
tion in  length  of  the  performance  Is  often  as  much 
as  from  one  hour  and  a  half  at  the  duller  moments 
of  the  day  to  forty-five  minutes  at  the  more 
crowded.  When  the  performances  are  shortened.  It 
would  merely  result  In  giving  a  greater  number  than 
those  stated:  rarely,  If  ever,  would  the  number 
be  less. 


TABLE  II 

Regular  Theatres 

No.  of 

Seating  weekly 

Name.  capacity,    performances. 
Opera. 

Boston  Opera  House 2,718  5 

First-class  Theatres. 

Hollis  Street  Theatre 1,640  8 

Colonial 1,602  8 

Park 1,275  8 

Tremont       i,73S  8 

Shubert i»590  8 

Majestic       1,725  8 

Globe       1,531  8 

Boston 2,848  8 

Popular. 

Grand  Opera  House i>979  9 

Stock  House. 

Castle  Square  Theatre       1,813  12 

Vaudeville  Houses. 

Keith's  Theatre      2,020  12 

American  Music  Hall 1,792  12 

Burlesque  Houses. 

Gaiety  Theatre 1,479  12 

Casino      I,9S8  12 

Howard  Athenseum 1,489  12 

Columbia  Music  Hall        1,799  12 

Vaudeville  and  Moving  Picture. 

Palace  Theatre 1,000  30 

Hub  Theatre 1,169  12 

Bowdoin  Square  Theatre 1,365  12 

Austin  &  Stone's 351  54 


Weekly 
seating 
capacity. 

13,590 


13,120 
12,816 
10,200 
13,880 
12,720 
13,800 
12,248 
22,784 

111,568 

17,811 


21,756 


24,240 
21,504 

45.744 

17,748 
23,496 
17,868 
21,588 

80,700 

30,000 
14,028 
16,380 
18,954 

79,362 


Moving-picture  Theatres 

Perform-        Perform-         Weekly 

Seating  ances            ances            seating 

Name.                       capacity.  daily.            weekly.        capacity. 
Boston. 

Scenic  Temple 1,444  3               18            24.992 

Bijou  Dream 838  5               30            25,140 

*  Beacon 797 

Washington 529  8              48           25,392 

Unique 499  7              42           2  095 8 

Old  South 452  4              48           21,696 

Potter      446  3               18             8,028 

Crown 427  7             2,989 

Cofnique 397  12               72            28,584 

Star 365  13               78            28,470 

Pastime 360  8               48            17,280 

Paradise      352  10              60           21,120 

Premier 318  10              60            19,080 

Queen      310  7              42            13,020 

Empire 300  8               48            14,400 

Ye  Liberty 298  8               48            14,304. 

Joliette 276  10              60            16,560 

Dreamland 259  10              60            15,540 

Nickelodeon 135  9               54              7,290 

Roxbury. 

Roxbury 760  5               30           22,800 

Zenioon  Temple 425 

Winthrop  Hall 400 

Orienta 270  4              24             6,480 

South  Boston. 

Olympia 660  4              24            15,840 

Congress  Hall 550  3               18             9,000 

Imperial 430  4              24            10,320 

East  Boston. 

Scenfc  Temple 575  9             5,175 

Magic 198  6               36             7,128 

Empire 151  3               18             2,318 

Charlestozvn. 

Union 351  8             2,808 

Terminal 301  16             4,816 

402,428 

Dorchester. 

Happy  Hour 300 

Allston. 

Scenic  Temple 400 

Roslindale. 
Wise  Hall 250 

The  statistics  on  Moving-picture  Shows  do  not  include  those  located 
in  the  cities  of  Cambridge  and  Chelsea. 

♦  This  theatre  opened  Feb.  19,  1910,  with  8  daily  performance  (and  4  on  Sunday 
giving  a  weekly  capacity  of  38,256  seats. 

II 


TABLE   III 

Classified  List  of  Plays  from  Nov.  29,  1909, 

TO  Feb.  5, 

1910. 

No 

K  of  Per- 

Total 

Name  of  play. 

Theatre.               Jormances. 

capacity. 

Shakespearian  Tragedy 

Romeo  and  Juliet. 

Shubert. 

3 

4.770 

Hamlet. 

Shubert. 

2 

3,180 

Othello. 

Castle  Square. 

12 

21,756 

Shakespearian  Comedy. 

Twelfth  Night. 

Shubert. 

3 

4,770 

The  Merchant  of  Venice. 

Shubert. 

4 

6,360 

The  Taming  of  the  Shrew. 

'< 

3 

4,770 

The  Taming  of  the  Shrew. 

Castle  Square. 

12 

21,756 

Drama. 

Israel. 

Hollis. 

16 

26,240 

Awakening  of  Helena  Richie. 

Colonial. 

16 

25,632 

The  Battle. 

Majestic. 

16 

27,600 

Deborah  of  Tod's. 

Majestic. 

16 

27,600 

Honor. 

Castle  Square. 

12 

21,756 

Melodrama. 

A  Fool  there  was. 

Hollis. 

24 

39,360 

Van  Allen's  Wife. 

Park. 

16 

20,400 

The  Citv. 

Globe. 

16 

24,496 

The  Wolf. 

Globe. 

16 

24,496 

Nine  weeks  of  Performance. 

Grand  Opera. 

81 

160,299 

Comedy. 

What  Every  Woman  Knows. 

Hollis. 

8 

13,120 

Inconstant  George. 

" 

16 

26,240 

Detective  Sparkes. 

" 

16 

26,240 

The  Man  from  Home. 

Park. 

40 

51,000 

A  Gentleman  from  Mississippi. 

,    Park. 

16 

20,400 

Penelope. 

Colonial. 

16 

25,632 

The  Chaperone. 

Majestic. 

8 

13,800 

The  Circus  Man. 

Boston. 

32 

91,136 

Such  a  Little  Queen. 

Tremont. 

16 

27,760 

Rebecca  of  Sunnybrook  Farm. 

Tremont. 

40 

69,400 

Quincy  Adams  Sawyer. 

Grand  Opera. 

9 

17,811 

Farce. 

Man  with  a  Past. 

Castle  Square. 

12 

21,756 

Are  you  a  Mason.? 

Castle  Square. 

12 

21,756 

The  Girl  from  Rector's. 

Boston. 

18 

51,264 

Musical  Comedy. 

The  Young  Turk. 

Colonial. 

16 

25,632 

*  Miss  Mollie  May. 

" 

16 

25,632 

The  Silver  Star. 

" 

16 

25,632 

*  The  Beauty  Spot. 

Majestic. 

16 

27,600 

Dick  Whittington. 

Majestic. 

23 

39,675 

Bright  Eyes. 

Boston. 

31 

88,288 

Follies  of  1909. 

Tremont. 

24 

41,640 

The  Jolly  Bachelors. 

Globe. 

16 

24,496 

Mr.  Lode  of  Koal. 

Globe. 

16 

24,496 

"1915." 

Castle  Square. 

51 

92,463 

Minstrels. 

Dockstader's. 

Globe. 

16 

24,496 

Dancing. 

Ruth  St.  Denis. 

Park. 

8 

10,200 

*  "  Straight "  Musical  Comedy  performances;  the  others  listed  being  composed  of 
vaudeville  specialties. 


The  proportions  of  the  different  classes  of  plays 
are  as  follows:  Shakespeare  was  played  to  67,362 
seats  capacity.  Of  this  43,412  covered  two  weeks 
at  the  Castle  Square;  23,950,  the  Sothern  and 
Marlowe  engagement. 

The  seating  capacity  for  performances  of  Dramas 
was  124,828;  of  Melodrama,  269,051,  of  which 
160,299  was  at  the  Grand  Opera  House,  and  108,- 
752  at  the  regular  theatres.  The  performances  of 
Farce  amounted  to  94,776,  and  Minstrels  to  24,496. 
Comedy  took  372,539;  Musical  Comedy  (largely 
vaudeville),  415, 55f 

The  large  proportion  of  Shakespearian  drama  is 
explained  by  the  fact  that  two  Shakespearian  plays 
were  put  on  for  a  week  apiece  by  the  Castle  Square 
Theatre  Stock  Company,  and  that  Sothern  and 
Marlowe  appeared  as  the  opening  two  weeks'  at- 
traction at  the  new  Shubert  Theatre,  Two  clever 
American  comedies  were  "The  Gentleman  from 
Mississippi"  and  "The  Man  from  Home,"  portions 
of  the  runs  of  both  of  which  came  within  this  se- 
lected period.  Two  other  exceptional  comedies,  of 
slightly  whimsical  tendencies,  are  "What  Every 
Woman  Knows"  and  "Such  a  Little  Queen." 
Of  all  the  long  list  of  musical  comedies,  but  one, 
"Miss  Molly  May,"  had  any  particular  class. 
Two  plays  of  unusual  interest  were  "The  Awaken- 
ing of  Helena  Richie"  and  "The  City,"  the  latter 
being  probably  the  best  acted  play  of  the  year  and 
one  of  the  season's  most  powerful  modern  dramas. 
A  drama  of  some  power  and  of  a  certain  sociologi- 
cal interest  also  was  "The  Battle,"  played  for  two 
weeks  at  the  Majestic. 

For  a  season  in  which  farce  has  been  so  popular, 
this  division  was  very  poorly  represented  during 
the  ten  weeks,  only  three  being  listed  in  all,  and 
one  of  these  being  the  quite  unnecessarily  unpleas- 
ant and  suggestive  "Girl  from  Rector's."  Partial 
explanation  may  be  found  in  the  five  weeks  of 
13 


performances  of  "The  Blue  Mouse"  that  immedi- 
ately preceded,  and  the  engagements  of  "Going 
Some"  and  "Is  Matrimony  a  Failure?"  that 
immediately  followed  the  investigated  period. 
Musical  comedy  also  does  not  seem  to  have  its  full 
and  customary  complement  in  these  figures.  A 
great  run  of  such  shows,  earlier  in  the  season,  may 
account  for  this.  For  four  entire  weeks  out  of  the 
twelve  that  preceded  November  29,  all  of  the  seven 
principal  theatres  were  monopolized  by  musical 
comedies  or  farces!  Musical  comedy  had  been 
playing,  exclusively,  at  the  Boston  Theatre,  for 
these  twelve  weeks;  at  the  Majestic  for  nine  of  the 
twelve;  at  theTremont  for  ten;  and  at  the  Colonial 
for  six, —  a  total  of  thirty-seven  out  of  a  possible 
forty-eight  weeks!  Of  the  so-called  "literary" 
drama  there  has  been  a  considerable  deficit.  Suder- 
mann's  "Honor"  was  played,  in  a  very  poor  adapta- 
tion, for  one  week  at  the  Castle  Square  Theatre. 
Unless  one  or  two  of  those  plays  just  named  could 
be  included  in  this  classification,  nothing  in  the 
regular  theatrical  season  is  to  be  added  to  this 
somewhat  abbreviated  record. 

However,  Percy  Mackaye's  "The  Scarecrow" 
was  given  two  presentations  in  Brattle  Hall,  Cam- 
bridge, and  one  in  Jordan  Hall  (seating  1,019), 
Boston,  by  the  Harvard  Dramatic  Club;  the 
"Medea"  of  Euripides  in  Mr.  Gilbert  Murray's 
version  was  given  three  presentations  in  Jordan 
Hall  by  Bryn  Mawr  College  graduates;  and  Mr. 
William  Vaughn  Moody's  "Faith  Healer"  was  pre- 
sented, in  rather  a  commercialized  form,  by  Mr. 
Henry  Miller  at  Harvard,  on  invitation  of  the 
English  department.  These  three  results  of  pri- 
vate enterprise  have  somewhat  brought  up  the 
average. 

During  this  same  two  months  there  have  been  a 
great  plethora  of  dancing  attractions!  Ruth  St. 
Denis  danced  at  the  Park  Theatre  for  one  week  of 


eight  performances,  and  at  the  Colonial  and  HoUis 
for  four  afternoons  for  three  weeks, — a  total  of 
29,728  seats.  "The  Silver  Star"  was  played  at  the 
Colonial,  with  Adeline  Genee  as  the  principal  at- 
traction, the  capacity  being  25,632  seats.  Loie 
Fuller  and  her  Ballet  danced  at  the  Opera  House 
for  a  week,  with  a  total  capacity  of  21,744  i^^^ 
the  principal  feature  of  this  performance  was  given 
at  Keith's  Theatre  for  three  weeks  more).  Isa- 
dora Duncan  danced  once  at  the  Boston  Opera 
House,  2,718  seats;  Maud  Allan,  twice  at  Symphony 
Hall;  Gertrude  von  Axen,  once  at  Jordan  Hall,  1,019 
seats;  while  Raymond  Duncan  performed  once  at 
the  same  place,  as  did  also  the  Countess  Pierrefeu, — 
the  total  capacity  for  these  performances  of  danc- 
ing amounting  to  87,677  seats. 

The  vaudeville  situation,  as  represented  by  the 
better  class  houses  in  Boston,  such  as  Keith's  and 
the  American  Music  Hall,  is,  on  the  whole^  not 
unsatisfactory.  These  theatres  cater  to  audiences 
composed  largely  of  women  and  children,  and  their 
influence  is,  for  the  most  part,  at  least  innocuous, 
the  managers  having  apparently  learned  that  a 
clean  show  pays  better,  as  a  business  proposition, 
than  one  that  is  vicious  or  even  suggestive. 
The  worst  criticism  that  can  be  made  of  the  aver- 
age performance  at  these  houses  is  that  at  least 
half,  often  more,  of  the  acts  on  the  program  are 
just  plain  "padding,"  pure  and  simple,  inexcus- 
ably dull  and  mediocre.  This  condition  reflects 
more  upon  the  taste  of  the  audiences  than  upon 
the  lack  of  enterprise  of  the  management,  for  it  is 
axiomatic  that  so  long  as  the  attendance  is  satis- 
factory there  is  no  inducement  to  furnish  better 
(and  necessarily  higher-priced)  acts.  The  audi- 
ences are  too  good-natured,  too  easily  satisfied. 
Under  penalty  of  withholding  their  patronage  they 
should  demand  a  higher  average  standard  for  the 
whole  program. 

IS 


The  "playlet,"  so  called,  has  become  a  prominent 
feature  in  the  program.  It  is,  roughly  speaking,  of 
two  kinds,  farcical  or  sentimental.  The  same 
criticism  applies  to  both.  The  farce  or  the  senti- 
ment, as  the  case  may  be,  is  too  broadly  obvious. 
Little  is  left  to  the  imagination.  The  humor  is 
forced,  and  the  sentiment  too  often  mawkish,  in 
either  case  vitiating  the  taste  of  the  audience  and 
fatal  to  any  real  artistic  value.  The  actors  ap- 
parently credit  their  auditors  with  a  rather  lower 
order  of  intelligence  than  would  seem  to  be  justi- 
fied when  one  notes  the  quick  response  to  and  ready 
appreciation  of  an  occasional  piece  of  a  better  sort, 
performed  with  some  approach  to  artistic  merit. 
This  apparent  tendency  to  "play  down"  to  the 
audience  is  a  curious  reflection  upon  the  judgment 
and  sincerity  of  both  actor  and  producer. 
In  justice  to  these  theatres,  however,  it  is  only  fair 
to  state  that  they  offer  in  the  course  of  a  season 
many  acts  which  are  of  real  artistic  merit  and  value. 
Some  of  the  "head-liners"  in  their  programs  rank 
among  the  greatest  artists  of  the  contemporary 
stage,  comparing  favorably  with  many  of  the  al- 
leged stars  appearing  in  productions  at  the  regular 
theatres. 

By  popularizing  the  best  things  and  eliminating 
much  of  the  trash  which  now  cumbers  many  of  the 
programs,  this  class  of  entertainment  may  well 
exert  an  influence  for  good  which  will  be  far- 
reaching  and  redound  to  the  mutual  advantage 
and  profit  of  management  and  patron. 
At  the  Bijou  Dream  a  serious  attempt  has  been 
made  to  make  the  moving-picture  show  of  educa- 
tional value,  and  a  quite  surprising  list  of  features 
has  been  given  at  that  house  during  the  period 
covered  by  this  report, — short  lectures;  songs  of 
popular  and  musical  appeal,  such  as  the  Toreador 
song  from  "Carmen,"  for  instance;  and  moving 
pictures  showing  patriotic  events  and  scenes  of 
i6 


educational  value.  This  policy  has  proven  so 
successful  that  the  management  has  recently- 
raised  the  admission  from  ten  cents,  the  universal 
sum  elsewhere,  to  twenty  cents  for  afternoon  and 
evening,  and  the  house  continues  to  be  crowded. 
The  Boston  Opera  House  has  given  one  season 
of  grand  opera  by  its  own  company  and  a  short 
season  by  the  Metropolitan  Opera  Company. 
The  repertoire  has  consisted  of  standard  Italian 
and  French  operas,  including  popular  operas  of 
the  modern  school,  like  "La  Boheme,"  "La  Tosca," 
"Madame  Butterfly,"  "Cavalleria  Rusticana." 
The  staging  has  been,  for  the  most  part,  excellent 
and  up  to  date,  in  some  cases  magnificent;  the 
costuming  careful  and  artistic.  The  stage  detail 
has,  in  many  instances,  been  so  well  worked  up 
that  some  people  have  thought  the  tendency  was  to 
take  the  attention  away  from  the  things  of  impor- 
tance which  depend  entirely  upon  the  principals. 
The  singing  has  been  of  exceptional  excellence,  with 
markedly  good  chorus  work.  The  subscription 
performances  have  been  well  supported,  and  the 
audiences,  excepting  on  Thursday  nights,  always 
large.  The  Sunday  concerts  by  operatic  stars  have 
been  much  enjoyed,  and,  while  some  interest  was 
evinced  in  the  Saturday  night  debutante  perform- 
ances, they  have  been  recently  abandoned  in  favor 
of  a  "popular-priced"  performance  on  that  same 
evening. 

Criticism  of  the  standard  operas  would  be  as  much 
out  of  place  as  criticism  of  Shakespeare  or  Goethe. 
Some  of  them  may  be  old-fashioned,  but  they  illus- 
trate the  highest  attainments  of  musical  dramatic 
art.  One  may  enlarge  upon  the  poor  quality  of 
many  of  the  older  librettos,  or  upon  the  depart- 
ure from  high  standards  of  morals  in  librettos, 
both  old  and  new,  but  it  is  to  be  remembered  that 
the  libretto  is  not  so  much  a  record  of  life  as  a 
record  of  moods  which  the  music  seizes  and  takes 
17 


Regular  Theatre  Attractions 


Theatre. 

No.  of  per- 
formances 
per  week. 

November  29- 
December  4. 

December 
S-ii. 

December 
12-18. 

Decembe 
19-25. 

Hollis     .... 

8 

Detective 

Sparkes.* 

" 

A  Fool 
there  was. 

" 

Colonial    .    .    . 

8 

R,r. 

Miss  Mollie 
May. 

Park      .... 

8 

nth  Week. 
Gentleman 
from 
Mississippi. 

Van  Allen's 
Wife. 

Tremont    .    .    . 

8 

Such  a  Little 
Queen.* 

Follies 
of  1909. 

Shubert     .    .    . 

7 

Majestic    .   .   . 

8 

The 
Chaperon.' 

Deborah 
of  Tod's 

The 
Battle. 

Globe     .... 

8 

2d  Week. 
The  City. 

" 

Bachelors. 

" 

Boston  .... 

8 

Circus 
Man.» 

" 

" 

Grand  Opera 
House    .   .   . 

9 

Volunteer 
Organist.' 

Girl  from 
U.  S.  A. 

Little 
Tenor. 

Cowboy  I 
TUef.       I 

Castle  Square  . 

12 

Honor.' 

Taming  of 
the  Shrew. 

Man  with 
a  Past. 

"191S." 

Bowdoin  Square, 

12 

Held  by  the 
Enemy.' 

Way  Down 
in  Maine. 

Daughters  of 
the  Poor. 

Policy 
Changed 
Moving- 
picture 
House. 

•  Those  plays  marked  with  a  star  opened  or  closed  the  first  or  last  weeks  of  thi  id 
Of  other  attractions,  "What  Every  Woman  Knows,"  "The  Man  from  Home 
City"  played  one  week,  and  "The  Gentleman  from  Mississippi"  ten  weeks  before 

A.  "Dick  Whittington"  did  not  open  until  Tuesday  night  on  account  of  a  brc 

B.  "Bright  Eyes"  did  not  open  until  Tuesday  night  on  account  of  the  compan; 

C.  "iQis"  at  the  Castle  Square  did  not  open  until  Friday  night  of  Christmas 

Z>.  Two  extra  performances  of  "The  Girl  from  Rector's"  were  given  ThursdajJtBT 


•V.  29,  1909,  TO  Feb.  5,  1910 


r26- 
I. 

January 
2-8. 

January 
9-iS. 

January 
16-22. 

January 
23-29. 

January  30- 
February  5. 

Inconstant 
George. 

" 

Israel 

" 

What  Every 

Woman 

Knows. 

ng 

I 

Silver  Star. 

Penelope. 

... 

The  Man 
from  Home. 

" 

" 

" 

Rebecca  of 
Sunnybrook 
Farm. 

" 

" 

■' 

■■ 

Theatre 
opened 
January  34. 

Taming  of 
the  Shrew  (3). 
Merchant  of 
Venice  (3). 
Romeo  and 
Juliet  (I). 

Hamlet  (2).* 
Merchant  of 
Venice  (i). 
Twelfth 
Night  (3). 
Romeo  and 
Juliet  (2). 

Dick         A. 
Whittington. 

" 

" 

The 
Beauty  Spot. 

"  • 

• 

" 

Minstrels. 

Mr.  Lode 
of  Koal. 

... 

B. 

" 

" 

The  Girl  from 
Rector's. 

"  »    D. 

id 

Sal  the 
Circus  Gal. 

The  Gam- 
bler of  the 
West. 

Counsel  for 
the  Defence  (4). 
Dr.  JekyU  and 
Mr.  Hyde  (3). 
The  BeUs  (2). 

Working- 
man's  Wife. 

Quincy 
Adams 
Sawyer.* 

" 

" 

Othello. 

Are  you  a 

Mason?  • 

id. 

1  of  Sunnybrook  Farm "  are  still  running  at  their  respective  theatres;  and  "The 

I  flooding  the  theatre  on  Monday. 

by  a  blizzard. 

being  kept  dark  the  first  part  of  the  week  for  final  rehearsals. 

:emoons  of  the  week  of  January  30 


up  Into  abstract  realms  of  emotion.  The  power 
of  the  composer  to  fitly  and  ideally  intrepret  hu- 
man moods  in  music  is  the  index  of  musical  devel- 
opment in  opera.  Some  have  objected  that  so 
much  time  should  be  given  to  the  Italian  and 
French  schools  and  none  so  far  to  the  German; 
but  new  generations  of  opera-goers  are  coming 
upon  the  scene,  who  should  know  the  standard 
works  of  art  of  the  past,  whether  Italian,  French, 
or  German.  Besides,  what  the  Boston  company  has 
not  given  is  supplied  by  the  New  York  companies 
in  Wagner  seasons,  and  such  modern  operas  as 
"Pelleas  and  Melisande,"  "Louise,"  and  "Electra." 
The  ballet,  when  used,  has  been  effective,  es- 
pecially in  the  performance  of  "La  Gioconda," 
where  it  was  of  exceptional  beauty,  appropriately 
introduced,  and  performed  with  exquisite  art. 
On  the  whole,  the  Opera  House  management  has 
given  to  Boston  exceptional  opportunities  for  en- 
joying musical  art,  second  only  to  those  offered 
by  the  Symphony  Orchestra. 

While  not  originally  intended  as  a  part  of  this 
report,  it  is  necessary  to  a  fair  understanding  of 
the  case  that  the  great  number  of  so-called  "con- 
certs" in  the  theatres  and  moving-picture  shows  in 
and  about  Boston  on  every  Sunday  evening  should 
be  recorded.  The  moving-picture  shows  run  four 
to  six  performances  on  Sunday  evenings.  The 
theatres,  even  some  of  those  playing  straight  at- 
tractions during  the  week,  are  given  over  to  the 
same  type  of  Sunday  night  "concert,"  to  which 
is  added,  for  the  most  part,  the  poorer  sort  of 
vaudeville  "acts"  to  be  seen  at  the  same  theatres, 
or  at  the  vaudeville  and  burlesque  houses,  during 
the  week.  These  "concerts"  are  more  fully  at- 
tended than  the  performances  of  any  other  night 
except  Saturday,  so  the  entire  number  of  seats 
available  at  these  performances  can  be  justly  added 
to  the  grand  total  of  burlesque  and  vaudeville. 


The  Grand  Opera  House,  not  listed  In  the  table, 
gives  a  weekly  Sunday  night  performance  In 
Yiddish  with  a  New  York  company.  It  may  be 
noted  here  that  the  "concert"  at  the  Boston 
Opera  House  is  probably  the  only  high-class  under- 
taking in  the  entire  number  given.  The  number 
of  Sunday  evening  performances  has  been  com- 
piled in  tabulated  form.  The  total  of  attendance 
shows  the  total  capacity  of  the  houses  for  that  one 
evening. 


TABLE  IV 
Sunday  Night  Performances 


No.  of 
performances. 


Boston  Opera  House 

Globe 

Castle  Square 

Keith's 

American     . 

Howard 

Columbia , 

Bowdoin , 

Austin  &  Stone's 3 

Palace 3 

Bijou  Dream 2 

Washington 2 

Unique 3 

Old  South 3 

Crown      I 

Comique      6 

Star 4 

Pastime 4 

Paradise 4 

Premier 4 

Queen 3 

Empire 3 

Liberty 3 

Joliette 4 

Dreamland      4 

Scenic  Temple,  East  Boston    ...  i 

Magic,  East  Boston 3 

Empire,  East  Boston 2 


Seating 
capacity. 


3SI 
1,000 
838 
529 
499 
452 
427 
397 
36s 
360 
352 
318 
310 
300 
298 
276 
259 
575 
198 

151 


Total 
Seating 
capacity. 

2,718 

1,531 

1,813 

2,020 

1,792 

1,489 

1,799 

1,365 

953 

3,000 

1,676 

1,058 

1,497 

1,356 

427 

2,382 

1,460 

1,440 

1,408 

1,272 

930 

900 

894 

1,104 

1,036 

575 

594 

302 


38,791 


Ill 

Any  examination  of  the  dramatic  departments  in 
the  daily  and  Sunday  papers  cannot  fail  to  sug- 
gest that  there  exists  a  very  definite  relation  be- 
tween criticism  and  advertising.  For  instance,  why 
else  does  the  Transcript  criticise  performances  at 
the  Casino  and  Gaiety  Theatres  on  Tuesday  night, 
and  mention  them  in  advance  notices  on  Satur- 
day evening,  when  it  ignores  the  Howard  and 
Columbia,  theatres  of  exactly  the  same  class? 
Complaint  is  constantly  made  by  the  public  that 
the  papers  do  not  make  a  proper  attempt  to  in- 
form their  readers  of  the  kind  of  show  that  is  be- 
ing given  at  the  different  classes  of  theatres.  No 
emphasis,  for  instance,  is  placed  on  the  fact  that 
the  burlesque  performances  are  in  any  way  dif- 
ferent from  musical  comedies  or  farces  reviewed 
at  the  more  legitimate  play-houses.  From  any- 
thing that  the  public  can  tell  by  reading  these 
advertisements,  a  performance  at  the  Casino  may 
be  just  as  respectable  and  refined  as  one  at  the 
Colonial  or  the  Hollis  during  the  same  week.  It 
may  be  argued  that  this  is  a  minor  matter,  and  that 
those  attending  the  different  theatres  know  what 
to  expect.  Nevertheless,  while  the  managers  of 
the  principal  theatres  themselves  (outside  of  the 
vaudeville  and  burlesque  houses)  make  no  attempt 
to  specialize  or  follow  a  consistent  policy  for  their 
houses,  the  public  is  constantly  being  misled. 
It  is  well  known  to  every  play-goer  that  the  public 
is  never  accurately  informed  when  plays  are  not 
worth  seeing!  The  critic  is  then  disposed  to  dis- 
guise his  sentiments  within  a  mist  of  words  which 
quite  prevent  the  ordinary  reader  from  discov- 
ering whether  or  not  he  will  obtain  his  money's 
worth  by  attending  the  performance  under  discus- 
sion. In  this  custom — for  it  has  grown  to  be  such 
— all  of  the  newspapers  are  in  common  fault.     Is 


It  not  possible  that  they  have  overlooked  their 
duty  to  the  public  by  keeping  their  eye  too  closely 
upon  the  counting  house?  While  it  may  be  difficult 
to  adopt  a  standard  that  will  apply  suitably  to  the 
entire  theatre-going  public,  it  is  not  sl  difficult 
matter  to  state  clearly  and  exactly,  in  a  few  words, 
the  type  of  play  given  at  the  various  theatres, 
and  its  comparative  standing  in  the  grade  or  class 
to  which  it  belongs. 

Rather  an  exception  to  this  state  of  affairs  occurred 
in  reviews  of  "The  Girl  from  Rector's."  The 
morning  papers  on  Tuesday,  January  25,  make  it 
quite  plain  that  the  play  was  "a  little  beyond  de- 
scription"; "raw,"  with  "four  acts  of  double  life 
and  marital  infidelity  that  are  painted  in  brutally 
frank  colors,"  "bristling  with  slang  from  Broad- 
way's all-night  joints  and  allusions  that  have  not 
even  the  delicacy  of  double  meaning,"  "a  dance 
with  three  girls  .  .  .  that  for  rank  suggestiveness 
has  probably  never  been  seen  outside  of  the  real 
old  Moulin  Rouge  in  its  palmiest  days"  (this  from 
the  Herald).  Whether  or  not  the  Transcript  was 
trying  to  counteract  this  unusual  frankness  in  that 
morning's  criticism  is,  judging  from  the  following 
excerpts  from  its  criticism  of  the  same  evening, 
an  interesting  question!  "There  is  no  doubt  that 
the  spectators  enjoyed  themselves,  and  whatever 
stern  moralists  may  say  in  regard  to  plays  like 
'The  Girl  from  Rector's'  there  is  unquestionably  a 
large  part  of  our  theatre-going  population  that  like 
this  sort  of  play."  (There  is! — 51,264  of  them,  In 
Boston!)  "As  for  double  lives,  men  have  been 
leading  them  since  the  days  of  Adam  and  Lillth 
and  some  of  the  best  of  the  old  Greek  comedies 
are  built  up  around  a  tale  of  marital  infidelity." 
"The  last  act,  whether  viewed  from  the  point  of 
morality  or  of  art,  is  inferior  to  the  others."  Those 
who  saw  this  act  will  acknowledge  that  this  calmly 
reserved  statement  is  drawing  it  somewhat  mildly, 
23 


to  say  the  least.  Palliative  comment  such  as  this 
certainly  lends  color  to  the  suspicion  that  the  news- 
paper frequently  does  not  prove  itself  a  proper 
guardian  or  informant  of  the  public. 
The  morals  of  theatrical  advertising  are  also  not 
to  be  overlooked  in  this  connection.  The  papers 
for  Saturday,  Jan.  29,  and  Sunday,  Jan.  30, 
1910,  carried  this  advertisement:  "Keith's  Theatre, 
Third  Big  Week,  breaking  all  records.  Loie  Fuller's 
Ballet  of  Light  and  Barefoot  Dancers,"  the  impli- 
cation obviously  being  that  Loie  Fuller  and  her 
entire  Ballet  were  dancing  at  this  theatre. 
In  versions  printed  in  the  text  columns  the  impli- 
cation was  even  broader,  it  being  stated,  prac- 
tically in  so  many  words,  that  the  same  act  that 
had  been  given  on  the  stage  of  the  Opera  House 
was  to  be  repeated  at  Keith's  Theatre.  All  the 
press  reports  and  criticisms  of  the  performance 
said  nothing  in  denial  of  this  claim;  yet  the  facts 
were  that  only  seven  of  the  dancers  appeared  in  the 
advertised  act,  Loie  Fuller  herself,  for  a  part  of 
the  time,  not  being  one  of  the  number!  Such  mis- 
representation as  this  is  common.  "The  Mid- 
night Sons,"  a  current  attraction,  announces  "Com- 
pany of  250."  This  number  should  be  about 
divided  in  half,  only  a  few  over  a  hundred  appear- 
ing on  the  stage.  Hardly  a  bulletin  board  an- 
nouncing a  New  York  run  but  brazenly  and  boldly 
lies  about  its  extent.  Ten  or  twelve  weeks  in 
New  York  (several  of  which  were  very  probably 
in  Brooklyn  or  in  remotely  situated  theatres)  is 
advertised  on  the  road  as  "One  Year  in  New  York," 
or  "300  Nights  on  Broadway."  A  season  of  30 
weeks  (divided  among  the  same  groups  of  theatres) 
is  advertised  on  the  road  as  "70  weeks  in  New 
York"  or  "490  days  in  New  York."  More  con- 
scientious managers  actually  run  their  plays  in 
the  smaller  New  York  theatres  week  after  week  at 
considerable  loss  to  themselves,  in  order  to  get 
24 


some  excuse  for  sending  them  upon  the  road  as  a 
claimed  "Broadway  Success"  with  a  record  for 
a  long  run! 

IV 

After  the  Iroquois  fire  a  law  was  passed  by  the 
Massachusetts  legislature  which,  in  the  main, 
raised  the  standard  for  the  safety  of  buildings  to 
be  used  for  theatrical  purposes.  Unfortunately, 
this  law  applied  only  to  buildings  thereafter  to  be 
constructed,  so  thereby  largely  losing  its  effect, 
inasmuch  as  the  greatest  danger  naturally  existed 
in  the  older  buildings  already  in  use. 
The  Howard  Athenaeum  is  an  old,  exceedingly 
frail  and  dry,  wooden  structure.  The  auditorium 
is  on  the  second  story  (also  true  of  the  Bijou  Dream 
and  Nickelodeon),  and,  while  it  has  since  been 
equipped  with  all  the  possible  preventives  that 
can  be  imposed  by  the  building  department,  it  is  not 
a  safe  auditorium  to  receive  the  crowds  that  throng 
it  twice  a  day. 

The  Palace  has  an  auditorium  on  the  street  floor, 
but  there  is  no  exit  for  the  audience  except  from 
the  front  of  the  auditorium,  that  necessitates  passing 
directly  over  the  boiler-room  which  is  located  under 
the  entrance  lobby,  staircases  and  sidewalk! 
Austin  &  Stone's  hall  is  on  the  street  floor,  but 
the  dressing-rooms  are  partly  in  a  temporary  wooden 
building  on  the  second  and  third  stories  of  the  same 
structure.  This  house  seats  only  351,  and  there 
appears  little  excuse  for  its  now  being  licensed  as  a 
theatre,  inasmuch  as  it  does  not  comply  with  any 
of  the  requirements  imposed  by  the  building  law. 
On  the  other  hand,  almost  all  the  moving-picture 
shows,  of  more  recent  construction,  of  larger  size, 
and  more  nearly  complying  with  these  laws,  have 
been  continually  refused  theatre  licenses  by  the 
licensing  authorities. 

In  the  case  of  one  other  theatre,  the  Columbia,  the 
25 


top  gallery  is  pitched  at  an  angle  that  can  hardly 
be  imagined  by  any  one  who  has  not  visited  it. 
This  extreme  pitch  has  been  the  cause  of  several 
serious  accidents.  It  would  seem  that  this  bal- 
cony could  be  altogether  closed  to  the  public  with- 
out much  loss  to  the  management  and  with  con- 
siderable betterment  to  public  safety. 
New  legislation  is  needed — and  badly  needed — to 
bring  the  older  auditoriums  of  the  city  into  a  con- 
dition where  they  will  accommodate,  with  safety, 
the  public  which  now  crowds  them.  New  and 
proper  legislation  is  also  needed  to  define  and  con- 
trol the  "moving-picture  theatre";  whose  exist- 
ence is  not  recognized  in  the  present  statutes!  The 
building  department  makes  monthly  inspections 
of  these  theatres,  but  entirely  on  its  own  initiative. 
The  Bijou  Dream  is,  in  a  way,  the  most  dangerous 
of  them  all,  especially  as  the  audience  here  is  com- 
posed largely  of  women  and  children.  This  theatre 
has  a  staircase  leading  straight  down  from  the 
auditorium  to  the  street  in  one  continuous  flight  of 
thirty-two  steps!  In  a  panic,  or  in  case  of  any  one 
stumbling  upon  this  staircase,  a  dangerous  block- 
ade would  be  absolutely  unavoidable.  The  new 
laws  require  a  landing  between  every  fifteen  steps, 
and  these  laws  were  in  force  at  the  time  the  Bijou 
Dream  was  opened  to  be  regularly  used  as  a  mov- 
ing-picture show-house!  Technically,  the  law  may 
not  have  been  evaded,  but  a  license  for  regular 
performances  could  at  that  time  have  been  with- 
held at  the  discretion  of  the  licensing  authority! 
The  provisions  made  to  protect  those  appearing 
on  the  stage  of  the  Bijou  Dream  are  also  totally 
inadequate.  A  narrow,  boxed-in,  blind  staircase 
winds  deviously  down  from  temporary  dressing- 
rooms  located  on  the  roof  of  the  building  over 
the  auditorium.  In  case  of  fire  it  would  be  a  prac- 
tical Impossibility  for  any  in  these  rooms  to  escape. 
Probably  it  will  need  a  catastrophe  of  considerable 
importance  and  magnitude  to  bring  these  matters 
26 


before  the  public  with  sufficient  force  to  cause 
effective  action  to  be  taken.  It  cannot  be  stated 
too  strongly  at  this  time  that  this  report  is  only  one 
more,  and  perhaps  the  last,  time  they  will  be 
brought  to  the  attention  of  the  authorities,  and 
that,  if  any  accident  (such  as  the  Iroquois  Theatre 
fire)  comes  to  any  one  of  these  places,  the  respon- 
sibility for  that  accident  will  lie  upon  the  licensing 
authority  alone,  the  Mayor  of  the  City  of  Boston! 
Chapter  450,  Section  6,  of  the  Acts  of  1904,  calls 
for  the  publication,  by  the  licensing  officer,  of  a 
yearly  report  on  the  condition  of  theatres  and 
public  halls.  This  stipulation,  for  some  reason  or 
other,  has  never  been  complied  with. 
The  management  of  all  the  older  houses  evidenced 
both  willingness  and  alacrity  to  comply  with  all 
the  protective  measures  asked  of  them  by  the  au- 
thorities. There  is  hardly  a  first-class  theatre 
in  town,  for  instance,  that  has  the  number  of 
actual  fire-escapes  and  exits  to  be  found  at  the 
Howard  Athenaeum.  Yet  the  adoption  of  the 
proper  kind  of  legislation  could  be  made  to  result  in 
great  improvements  in  all  these  old  structures, 
without  inflicting  any  serious  injury  upon  their 
owners  or  lessees.  Otherwise,  there  is  nothing 
to  prevent  these  buildings  remaining  in  use  until 
they  burn  up  or  fall  down  from  a  decrepit  old  age. 
So  far  a  few  of  the  cheaper  theatres  have  been 
mentioned  by  name  and  an  idea  of  their  most 
serious  defects  given.  Any  theatre-goer  who  is 
curiously  inclined  might  wait  after  any  perform- 
ance at  the  first-class  houses,  note  for  himself  the 
time  required  to  empty  the  house,  and  then  draw 
his  own  conclusions.  Attention  might  particu- 
larly be  directed  to  the  Colonial,  Hollis,  Globe, 
and  Bowdoin  Square  Theatres,  no  one  of  which 
was  built  to  come  under  the  building  laws  now 
in  force.  The  Tremont  is  perhaps  provided  with 
the  greatest  number  of  efi'ective  exits,  the  Shu- 
27 


bert  following  it  a  close  second.  In  the  case  of 
the  Boston  Theatre,  while  the  floor  can  be  readily 
emptied,  the  balconies,  especially  the  topmost 
one,  would,  if  crowded,  become  the  inevitable  scene 
of  dire  accident  in  the  case  of  a  panic  or  fire. 
It  is  a  matter  of  record  that  early  in  December 
last  an  attack  was  instigated  against  the  manage- 
ment of  some  of  the  principal  moving-picture 
shows.  The  regular  theatre  pays  a  license  of  $ioo 
a  year:  the  moving-picture  show  license  amounts 
to  $75.  In  every  case  the  moving-picture  show 
would  be  glad  to  pay  the  extra  $25  in  order  to  have 
a  regular  theatre  license.  Inasmuch  as  their  seat- 
ing capacity  does  not,  in  most  cases,  exceed  a  few 
hundred,  this  has  been  made  an  excuse  for  refusal 
to  issue  a  full  theatre  license.  The  last  admin- 
istration also  assumed  the  responsibility  of  defin- 
ing the  scope  of  a  moving-picture  show,  and  re- 
stricting the  performance  to  moving  pictures,  with  a 
single  song  not  to  exceed  five  minutes  in  length, 
evidently  with  the  intention  of  preventing  these 
entertainments  from  competing  in  any  degree 
with  the  vaudeville  theatres! 

This  action  conflicted  with  a  State  law  that  re- 
quired the  moving-picture  manager  to  run  no  films 
without  turning  up  the  lights  for  five  minutes  out 
of  every  twenty,  and  "varying"  the  entertain- 
ment (this  in  order  to  rest  the  eyes  of  the  audience). 
They  were  consequently  forced  to  put  in  a  vaude- 
ville turn  or  two  to  entertain  their  public  during 
the  time  the  pictures  could  not  be  run. 
In  spite  of  this  conflict  the  mayor  attempted  to 
enforce  his  restriction,  and  the  matter  was  brought 
to  a  head  by  the  closing  of  three  of  the  principal 
of  these  theatres  on  their  busiest  day,  a  Saturday. 
After  running  several  hours  over  the  time  when 
they  had  been  commanded  to  stop  performances, 
the  owners,  under  legal  advice,  finally  closed  down, 
and    applied    for    an    Injunction    to    restrain    inter- 


ference  with  their  business.  Before  the  hearing 
was  held  on  the  injunction,  the  mayor  restored  their 
licenses  after  first  compelling  the  managers  all  to 
sign  papers  acknowledging  that  they  had  been  in  the 
wrong!  In  the  judgment  of  several  of  those  who 
have  had  occasion  to  investigate  the  matter,  there 
seems  to  be  no  doubt  but  that  this  wholly  arbi- 
trary attempt  to  control  the  moving-picture  per- 
formances was  primarily  instigated  by  some  of  the 
local    vaudeville    interests. 


Whether  or  not  the  question  of  morality  should 
enter  into  a  review  of  this  sort  might  have  re- 
mained in  doubt,  had  not  that  side  of  the  matter 
been  brought  directly  before  the  Committee  by 
the  two  weeks'  engagement,  at  the  largest  theatre 
in  Boston,  with  a  seating  capacity  of  2,848,  of 
*'The  Girl  from  Rector's,"  played  to  "standing 
room  only,"  with  eight  performances  the  first 
week  and  ten  performances  (two  extra  matinees!) 
the  second, — a  total  of  51,264  people  seating 
capacity!  This  play  had  been  publicly  condemned 
in  a  recent  frank  and  outspoken  article  in  the  Ameri- 
can Magazine.  It  carried  no  appeal  other  than  a 
purely  salacious  or  suggestive  one,  besides  being 
incredibly  stupid  and  boresome.  Certainly,  it  was 
a  peculiar  commentary  on  human  nature — even 
in  Boston — that,  despite  (or  possibly  because  of) 
this  unsavory  advance  reputation,  it  so  crowded 
the  house  as  to  cause  the  management  to  add  two 
extra  matinees, — a  thing  that  has  hardly  happened 
before  in  the  memory  of  the  oldest  theatre-goer! 
Largely  because  of  this  incident,  it  has  become  im- 
possible to  review  conditions  as  they  exist  to-day  in 
the  theatres  of  Boston  without  recognizing  evi- 
dences of  a  decrease  in  standards  of  public  decency 
that  are  not  to  be  conscientiously  evaded.  For 
29 


years  a  production  known  as  "The  Black  Crook," 
in  reality  the  first  burlesque  show  of  the  type  that 
is  to-day  so  widely  prevalent,  has  long  possessed 
a  most  uneviable  reputation.  To-day  this  per- 
formance would  be  so  far  distanced  by  its  com- 
petitors that  it  would  hardly  cause  a  momentary 
ripple  of  discussion, — save  that  it  would  probably 
fail  to  find  audiences  enough  to  keep  it  on  the  road ! 
Only  a  few  years  ago,  when  the  first  so-called 
"barefoot  dancers"  came  to  Boston,  an  attempt 
was  made  to  head  off  or  prevent  the  performance, 
not  from  any  immorality  in  a  dancer  appearing  in 
bare  feet,  if  such  were  her  wish  or  the  desire  of 
the  management,  but  merely  because  it  was  evi- 
dently the  beginning  of  a  further  breaking  down 
of  those  barriers  that  separate  the  audience  from 
the  performer  upon  the  stage.  This  suspicion  has 
been  more  than  realized.  In  a  comparatively 
brief  time,  about  a  year,  there  has  been  a  perfect 
deluge  of  dancers  appearing  with  a  less  and  less 
amount  of  conventional  apparel,  and  the  fact  that 
the  most  slightly  dressed  among  them  have  been 
those  that  have  appealed  to  the  most  intelligent 
and  refined  audiences  does  not  alter  the  physical 
aspect  of  the  case.  Those  who  keep  in  mind  the 
progress  of  the  theatre  sit  back  and  wonder  what 
is  next  in  store. 

Equally  undesirable,  and  evidencing  the  same 
tendency  in  a  form  perhaps  still  more  to  be  dep- 
recated, have  been  the  attempts  made  by  cer- 
tain managers  further  to  remove  the  barrier  be- 
tween performer  and  audience  by  sending  members 
of  the  company  over  the  footlights  at  every  per- 
formance. This  has  been  accomplished  in  differ- 
ent ways.  One  of  the  most  sensational  illusions 
has  been  the  sending  of  a  balloon  or  aeroplane  out 
over  the  heads  of  the  audience,  carrying  one  or 
two  girls  singing;  or  swings  carrying  a  chorus 
far  out  over  the  auditorium  and  back  and  up  among 
30 


the  flies  of  the  stage.  Sometimes  the  entire  chorus, 
dressed  as  Hussars,  march  out  over  the  footlights, 
to  sing  a  verse  of  their  song  standing  in  single 
file  down  each  of  the  centre  aisles  of  the  house;  or 
performers,  stationed  at  different  places  around  the 
auditorium,  sing  or  converse  with  people  upon  the 
stage,  or,  from  locations  in  the  boxes  or  in  stalls 
near  the  footlights-,  take  a  regular  part,  by  con- 
versation or  song,  in  the  performance.  Again 
it  is  asked,  and  rightly,  What  will  be  the  next 
innovation  embodying  this  same  appeal.?  and 
again  those  interested  in  the  development  of 
the  stage  await  with  some  anxiety  the  opening  of 
a  new  season  and  the  production  of  a  new  batch  of 
plays! 

The  entertainment  regularly  found  at  some  classes 
of  theatres  does  not  tend  to  improve  or  refine  the 
moral  sense,  in  case  any  still  exists  in  the  specta- 
tors. In  some  cases  it  appears  to  be  distinctly 
the  intention  of  those  directing  or  responsible  for 
the  performance  to  debase  or  destroy  such  a  sense. 
In  the  opinion  of  many  persons  the  performances 
given  every  week,  twice  a  day,  at  the  Gaiety, 
Casino,  Columbia,  and  Howard,  are  seriously  in- 
jurious and  depraving  to  those  who  habitually 
attend  these  theatres.  Whatever  the  consensus 
of  opinion  may  be  in  regard  to  the  question  of 
their  morality,  there  can  be  no  doubt  but  that 
many  reasons  may  be  found  for  deprecating  such 
public  exhibitions.  It  is  the  opinion  of  those  of 
the  Committee  who  have  investigated  particularly 
this  type  of  entertainment  that  all  of  these  theatres 
should  be  compelled  by  public  sentiment  to  clean 
house. 

The  recent  efforts  made  by  a  few  citizens  to  pre- 
vent an  objectionable  play  revealed  the  fact  that 
the  present  law  is  totally  inefficient  in  providing 
any  proper  control  over  theatrical  presentations, 
and    that    the    act  passed   by    the   legislature    two 


years  ago,  ostensibly  to  protect  public  morals,  was 
carried  by  the  Association  of  Theatrical  Managers,, 
written  by  their  lawyers,  and  so  cleverly  worded  that 
it  becomes  quite  impossible  to  take  any  effective 
action  under  the  law  as  laid  down  by  this  bill. 
The  matter  is  perhaps  stated  in  the  clearest  and 
best  possible  manner  in  the  appended  communica- 
tion from  Police  Commissioner  O'Meara,  under 
date  of  Feb.  lo,  1910: — 

Dear  Sir, — There  is  no  probability  that  any  perform- 
ance likely  to  be  given  in  a  theatre  could  be  attacked 
effectively  on  the  ground  of  immorality  by  prosecu- 
tion under  the  criminal  laws. 

A  theatre  may  be  reached  through  its  license.  The 
licensing  authority  is  the  mayor,  but  his  free  action  is 
obstructed  by  the  act  of  1908,  which  requires  that  both 
the  mayor  and  the  police  commissioner  shall  be  of  the 
opinion  jointly  that  particular  parts  of  a  performance 
are  immoral.  What  such  opinion  could  be  based  upon 
other  than  personal  observation  I  am  unable  to  say. 
Should  the  two  officials  be  in  agreement,  the  mayor  has  a 
right  to  direct  that  the  parts  of  the  performance  in  ques- 
tion be  eliminated.  I  presume  that  the  authority  would 
not  be  sufficient  to  justify  the  suppression  of  a  whole 
performance,  and  yet  the  worst  material  usually  con- 
sists of  gestures,  postures,  and  other  manifestations,  oral 
or  acted,  scattered  all  along  the  way.  Should  the  per- 
sons responsible  for  the  performance  fail  to  eliminate 
the  parts  indicated,  the  mayor  may  suspend  the  license 
of  the  theatre  for  "such  particular  representation," 
whatever  that  means. 

This  act  of  1908  was  passed,  I  believe,  on  petition  of 
the  Theatrical  Managers'  Association,  by  whose  coun- 
sel it  was  drawn,  and  it  is  as  nearly  worthless  as  the 
managers  probably  intended  it  should  be.  The  police 
commissioner  was  included  without  my  knowledge, 
and,  if  I  had  been  aware  of  the  intention  to  produce  so 
absurd  a  complication,  I  should  have  protested. 
The  full  power  should  be  with  the  licensing  authority. 
The  licensee  should  be  held  responsible  for  the  character 
of  every  performance  given  in  his  theatre,  and  punish- 

32 


ment   by   suspension   of   license   should    follow   any   un- 
lawful exhibition. 

Respectfully, 
(Signed)      Stephen  O'Meara, 


Police  Com 


mtsstoner. 


In  the  present  condition  of  affairs,  therefore,  noth- 
ing whatever  can  be  done  in  the  matter.  As  may 
be  seen  by  Mr.  O'Meara's  letter,  both  the  au- 
thorities and  the  public  are  utterly  powerless. 
The  practical  results  of  a  decision  recently  handed 
down  in  the  appellate  division  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  New  York  City  prove  this.  An  action 
was  brought  by  the  city  against  the  Alhambra 
Theatre  in  Harlem  to  recover  a  ^500  penalty  al- 
leged to  be  due  for  an  objectionable  performance 
given  on  December  20,  1907.  There  was  no  con- 
flict on  the  evidence,  but  a  decision  was  only  reached 
on  Feb.  4,  1910, — more  than  two  years  after  the 
date  of  the  performance  in  question.  The  gist  of 
the  situation  is  contained  in  the  following  para- 
graph, printed  in  the  papers  of  Saturday,  Feb.  5, 
1910: — 

"According  to  W.  H.  Grossman,  counsel  for  Percy 
Williams,  who  owns  the  Alhambra  Theatre,  the 
decision  leaves  the  situation  much  the  same  as  it 
always  has  been.  'Of  course,'  he  said,  'the  case 
will  come  up  for  retrial,  and  if  the  verdict  is  against 
us,  it  will  mean  the  payment  of  the  ^500  fine.  The 
theatre  license  cannot  be  revoked,  because  the 
license  referred  to  was  last  year's!'" 

An  unsuccessful  attempt  to  stop  a  play  could 
not  be  kept  out  of  the  public  press,  and  would 
merely  result  in  widely  and  effectively  advertising 
the  performance  to  the  public;  while  under  the 
present  law,  the  act  or  performance  could  be  con- 
tinued exactly  in  its  objectionable  form  until  the 
33 


matter  could  be  decided  by  the  Courts,  which  might 
be  in  one,  or  two,  or  three  years  after  the  initial 
step  had  been    taken! 

Under  a  properly-worded  law,  making  theatre 
licensees  responsible  for  the  performances  given, 
making  these  licenses  revocable  in  the  same  way 
every  other  license  issued  by  the  city  or  any  of 
its  departments  is  revocable,  and  making  it  pos- 
sible to  apply  the  criminal  law  as  it  exists  on  the 
statute  books  for  other  licensees  to  the  theatrical 
licensee,  immediate  retribution  would  overtake 
those  who  offend  against  public  morals,  and  the 
closing  of  a  theatre  for  one  day  would  mean  a 
monetary  loss  to  both  the  licensee  and  to  the  com- 
pany playing  the  house  that  would  act  as  a  most 
effective  deterrent  to  any  other  house  or  com- 
pany likely  to  come  under  a  similar  ban!  At  pres- 
ent no  authority  exists  capable  of  closing  a  house 
even  under  the  most  extreme  conditions,  no  matter 
how  flagrant  the  offence  may  be!*  It  must  be  re- 
membered that  such  offences  rarely,  if  ever,  con- 
sist of  directly  spoken  lines,  being  almost  alto- 
gether a  matter  of  implication  and  suggestion, 
over  which  it  would  be  impossible  to  exercise  suffi- 
cient censorship  or  control,  or  any  effective  legis- 
lation by  the  present  process  of  law.  The  plac- 
ing of  power  to  revoke  a  license  solely  in  the  hands 
of  the  licensing  officer  is  an  essential  preliminary 
step.  The  consideration  of  the  effect  of  such  rev- 
ocation, if  ill  advised,  would  in  itself  prove  a  con- 
siderable check  upon  the  undue  use  of  such  power: 
whereas  the  person  possessing  it,  when  well  advised, 
would   be   in   a   position   to  exercise   absolutely   an 

•The  action  of  a  previous  mayor,  in  causing  the  withdrawal  of  announced  per- 
formances of  the  Opera  of  "Salome"  and  the  abandonment  of  an  engagement  of  "The 
Queen  of  the  Moulin  Rouge"  was  taken  quite  without  authority  and  probably  was  only 
effective— in  each  case — because  the  management  did  not  expect  either  performance 
would  make  a  profitable  return  and,  under  the  circumstances,  it  was  not  worth  while 
to  enter  a  contest  with  the  authorities!  It  is  significant  that  this  prohibited  play  will 
be  presented  at  the  same  theatre  in  March  in  defiance  of  the  public  opinion  expressed 
against  its  performance  last  season. 

34 


influence  over  the  theatres,  probably  without  ever 
having  to  enforce  his  authority  to  the  extent  made 
possible  by  such  an  act  of  legislation. 

Frank  Chouteau  Brown, 

ChairmaUy 
Miss  Helen  A.  Clarke, 
Miss  LoTTA  A.  Clark, 
Robert  M.  Baker, 
Nathan  Haskell  Dole, 
William  F.  Macy, 

Drama  Committee. 

Edward  H.  Chandler, 

Secretary. 


35 


TTQ-R  ATJV 


REl 
TO 


RETURN  TO  the  circulation  desk  of  any 
University  of  California  Library 
or  to  the 
LO/        NORTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

H       Bldg.  400,  Richmond  Field  Station 
4  University  of  California 

Richmond,  CA  94804-4698 


f.gjj 


ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

•  2-month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling 
(510)642-6753 

•  1-year  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing 
books  to  NRLF 

•  Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made  4 
days  prior  to  due  date. 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


SE^fTOMft^^ 


-      JtJW  2  1  1999 


U.C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


CQElimSlE 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


